The Westfield Leader 1/31/2008

Cranford Cell Tower Fight Continues; 484 Sign Petition

By CHRISTINA M. HINKE

CRANFORD — The fight over erecting a cell-phone tower at the Cranford Swim Club continued before a packed house at Monday evening’s meeting of the Cranford zoning board of adjustment.

So far, 484 Westfield and Cranford residents have signed a petition against the proposal, Cranford resident Audrey Muratore told The Scotch Plains-Fanwood Times.

Another 90 people have hired attorney John Schmidt to defend their opposition to the monopole. Gregory Meese, an attorney representing New York SMSA Limited Partnership, clarified the setback variance to the board. He said the setback of the base of the 130-foot-high tower to the nearest residential-property line would be 39 feet. The front-setback requirement is 300 feet or three times the height of the tower, whichever is greater, resulting in a 390-foot frontsetback requirement to a residential property line, Mr. Meese said. The monopole’s proposed site is in a residential zone.

Cranford resident Frank Krause asked Glenn Pierson of PierCon Solutions, a radiofrequency design and engineering consultant testifying on behalf of the applicant, if the pole were to move about 300 feet from its current proposed spot, would it change the effects of cell-phone coverage.

“There is no major difference from a radiofrequency perspective,” Mr. Pierson replied. Mr. Krause suggested that the applicant should consider moving the pole near the pool at the Cranford Swim Club instead of near residential property lines. He said this change would also meet setback requirements.

Marjorie Meise of Cranford also queried Mr. Pierson. She asked if a satellite would be a suitable source of service for cell phones. “[A] satellite signal doesn’t get into a building. It is for outdoor or remote locations,” Mr. Pierson said.

Mr. Pierson also testified about cellphone-connectivity lapses. “It’s not
something you can do with digital or analog. It’s the radio-wave limitations,” he said.

Mr. Pierson presented the board with a graph showing data points of cellular traffic on traditional 800-MHz frequencies from 2006 to 2010. He said, beginning in 2010, a significant amount of blockage would occur on peak days, such as July 4 and during snowstorms or constructions, when cell phones are used more frequently.

Data services, such as text messages, would also block voice coverage, Mr. Pierson said. “We need to build out frequencies,” he said. “Come 2010, 800 mhz will be blocked.” He said 1,900-MHz frequency is being used today as a backup when 800 MHz is busy.

Mr. Pierson said the higher the frequency, the shorter the usable range. So, a 1,900-MHz frequency would cover less of an area than one of 800 MHz, resulting in the need for more towers. He also said that of the four cell-phone-carrier providers that would have cell coverage on the monopole, two operate on 800 MHz. Mr. Pierson also said, in his opinion, that if this tower application were approved, the applicant would require a second tower in Cranford to gain seamless coverage.

However, so far, the coverage maps supplied by the cell carriers shown in the subsequent meetings do not depict coverage of 800-MHz frequencies, as confirmed by Mr. Pierson.

The hearing will continue on Monday, March 10. Mr. Meese is expected to present one or two of his witnesses.

Mr. Schmidt will have his chance to present witnesses at a later date.

Local Source: Cranford News 1/30/2008

Cell Tower Decision Still a Few Months Away

By Paul Greulich
January 30, 2008

CRANFORD, NJ - Hours of witness testimony and cross-examination by attorneys on both sides of the controversial cell tower application left the issue unresolved Monday night.

The applicant, Verizon, is seeking height and setback variances needed to place the 130-foot pole on the grounds of the Cranford Swimming Club in a residential area.

The meeting ended at 11 p.m., at which point Zoning Board members stated there was no room in the schedule to continue the hearing until March 10.

Attorney John H. Schmidt Jr., who represents some 40-50 residents in the area of the proposed tower, said he expects there will be at least two more meetings before a vote is taken.

Much of Monday’s meeting was spent on Schmidt’s questioning of Glenn Pierson, one of the applicant’s witnesses and a principal of the PierCon Solutions of Lincoln Park, which provides engineering services for the applicant.

Discussion centered on whether there are any gaps in the area’s cellular coverage.

“I like to think I was able to establish that there was no present gap in coverage,” Schmidt said. “If I did that, the application should fail because one of their requirements is to show a gap in coverage.”

Verizon attorney Gregory Meese could not be reached for comment by press time.

At previous meetings, residents have complained that the applicant has presented data in a misleading way. Westfield resident Jack Schuvart said he thought things went well on Monday in the efforts to clear up some of the information that was before the board.
“Most of were rather pleased with the performance of the council we’d hired to handle it,” Schuvart said.

Freeholder Bette Jane Kowalski was also present. Kowalski has been the voice of the county’s opposition to the project because of its proximity to Lenape Park.

Since the proposal appeared, opposition has arisen from the State Historic Preservation Office, which has stated that the tower must be canceled or modified to mitigate its impact upon the adjacent Lenape Park and the Rahway River Park historic district.

The pole would feature four separate antennae servicing companies that include Omnipoint, Sprint and Verizon. Revenue generated for the swim club by having the tower on their property has been estimated at exceeding $20,000.

Area residents’ concern has focused on aesthetics and location in relation to property lines and the adjoining park, but there has also been mention of health hazards associated with living near cell towers, a factor that remains a topic of concern despite not yet having been scientifically substantiated.

“Personally I thought this was more interesting than CSI,” said Cranford resident Edward O’Malley.

O’Malley said that subjects that stir up a lot of emotion tend to take longer to resolve.

“The issue is getting a thorough vetting by the process here, and that’s rather gratifying,” he added.

Paul Greulich can be reached at 908-686-7700 ext. 121, or at theeagle@thelocalsource.com.

Action Alert! Zoning Board Meeting 1/28/2008

The Cranford Zoning Board of Adjustment will be holding a continuation meeting for the Cranford Swim Club cell tower proposal on Monday, January 28, 2008. This meeting will be absolutely crucial as attorneys for both the residents as well as the County of Union will be questioning the witnesses that Verizon has presented.

Meeting Information:

DATE: Monday, January 28, 2008

TIME: 8:15pm

PLACE: Cranford Municipal Building [Room 107], 8 Springfield Avenue, Cranford, New Jersey

The following will be heard:

Application #Z17-07: (Continuation)
New York SMSA Limited Partnership, Applicant
201 County Park Drive, Block 109, Lot 46, R-1 Zone

To permit construction of a telecommunications tower with the following variances/waivers:

Tower not permitted in the R-1 zone (136-33K(6);

To exceed the maximum allowable height for a tower (136-33K(10);

Less than the minimum required setback for a tower (136-33K(10)(b);

Less than the minimum required setback to a residential zone for a tower (136-33K(10)(c);

To exceed the maximum allowable square footage for an equipment cabinet (136-33K(12)(a);

Less than the minimum required front yard setback for equipment (136-30.6);

Less than the minimum required side yard setback (136-30.7)

PUBLIC PORTION - Any interested party may appear at said hearing and participate therein in accordance with the rules of the Zoning Board.

Please mark your calendars and make arrangements to attend. This meeting is absolutely crucial and we must have a strong residential turnout to show our complete opposition against this cell tower proposal!

We encourage you to bring along your friends, family members, neighbors; everyone and anyone who is willing to attend. There is absolute power in numbers and we need to clearly show our opposition before the board.

We hope to see you all there!

The Star Ledger 1/27/2008

Static Likely at Hearing on Cranford Cell Tower Proposal

Sunday, January 27, 2008
BY ROBERT E. MISSECK

The next step in the controversial proposal to build a cell tower almost double the legal height and with a shorter setback than usual at a private swim club in Cranford is scheduled to take place tomorrow night.

Verizon Wireless will resume its efforts to persuade the zoning board to approve the seven variances it needs to proceed with the project, which has prompted a growing group of residents opposing the tower to obtain legal counsel to help them in their fight.

Union County, which also is opposed to the tower, will send its attorney to the hearing, scheduled to begin at 8 p.m. in the municipal building, 8 Springfield Ave.

In addition to asking for a variance to build the 130-foot cell tower in a residential area, the applicant also wants permission to build the tower higher than the current limit of 70 feet, have a shorter setback on the property, and allow for a 345-foot equipment shelter with a 2,700-square-foot, fenced-in containment area.

John H. Schmidt Jr., the attorney representing about 50 Cranford and Westfield residents who are opposed to the project, said his approach during the ongoing zoning board sessions has been two fold.

"I don't believe that the cellular tower companies have adequately established a gap in the area coverage for which they claim they need it," he said of the tower.

"But, assuming they can get over that hurdle, they still have to satisfy the zoning board that the variances should be granted by proving the benefits of having the tower far outweigh any negative impact it may have on the surrounding community, which is a residential zone," said Schmidt.

While Verizon Wireless is the primary applicant, the tower would also be used by Sprint Mobile, AT&T and Omnipoint.

The attorney representing the cell tower applicants did not return telephone messages left for him.

Critics of the project said the club wants to use the profits from the tower to help offset membership dues and to make upgrades to the facility.

Residents are opposed to the tower because they believe it would be bad for the area's aesthetics and, therefore, the values of their homes.

State historic preservation officials are also against the project because they maintain its design would harm the area's historical status.

A review of the project by the state Department of Environmental Protection's Natural and Historic Resources, Historic Preservation Office concluded last spring that the proposed tower "will have an adverse effect" on the Rahway River Park Historic District across the street from the swim club property.

Schmidt said that while the DEP has sent a letter to the zoning board stating its position, it is not enough to prevent the project from proceeding.

Freeholder and Cranford resident Betty Jane Kowalski said she learned about the DEP's findings over the summer and agrees with its conclusions.

"The county is opposed to the cell tower because the site is just too close to Lenape Park, which the county owns, and the area is eligible for historical status," she said.

"And it would not be just the tower. They would also have to construct an access road and build a service shed," said Kowalski.

"The swim club property is not an appropriate site for this project," she said.

Schmidt said tomorrow night's meeting will probably not be the end of it.

"The applicant will probably need one if not two more hearings at least after this meeting," he said.

"After the testimony is concluded, the zoning board will then open the proceedings for public comment, and that may not happen until at least March," said Schmidt.

Robert E. Misseck may be reached at rmisseck@starledger.com or (908) 302-1507.

Cranford Chronicle 1/25/2008

Hellenbrecht Re-Appointed to Zoning Board

Friday, January 25, 2008
By LESLIE MURRAY

CRANFORD - The Township Committee settled on its annual appointments to the Zoning Board of Adjustment at a special meeting Wednesday night, just days before the board convenes to continue hearing a controversial application for a cell phone tower.

In something of a twist, one of the "new" members was the board chairman last year, who had at first been passed over for re-appointment.

At the New Year's Day re-organization meeting, the committee appointed Richard Brightman to a four-year term on the board, while Jerry DeNigris was appointed to the position of second alternate. Their appointments meant that Robert Hellenbrecht, who was chairman of the board in 2007 and whose term expired at the end of the year, would not be returning.

But during a special meeting on Wednesday, the committee accepted resignations from both DeNigris and Brightman, then turned around and appointed Hellenbrecht to the four-year term. To fill the second alternate position, the committee appointed Brightman. Neither Brightman nor DeNigris served on the board in 2007.

Hellenbrecht could not be reached for comment about his appointment. But in early January, when it appeared he would not be returning to the board, Hellenbrecht said he had told the Township Committee in late 2007 that he was interested in serving again. He said he received a second call confirming his interest; that was followed by a third call offering him the non-voting post of second alternate, which he declined.

Mayor Bob Puhak said despite not initially offering him a voting spot on the board, the committee had been satisfied with Hellenbrecht's service. Puhak declined to discuss the reasons for the initial decision, or the change of heart.

In related news, Puhak said Township Attorney Carl Woodward is drafting a memo regarding the committee's role in hiring the attorneys for both the Board of Adjustment and the Planning Board; that topic will be discussed at a later meeting. Starting last year, Cranford moved toward hiring municipal attorneys as independent contractors, instead of employees with pension and medical benefits.

The Board of Adjustment will meet for the first time this year on Monday, Jan. 28. During that meeting, the board will elect a chairman and continue hearing an application from a cooperative of four cellular carriers to build a 130-foot monopole and a 2,760-square foot equipment compound at the edge of the Cranford Swimming Club's County Park Drive property, along the border between Cranford and Westfield.

Verizon Wireless, Sprint Mobile, AT&T and Omnipoint, a branch of T-Mobile, say they need the tower to fill a gap in coverage. However, residents in both towns have expressed concern about the impact the pole would have on health, aesthetics and property values, and have retained an attorney to represent them in the case.

Cranford Chronicle 1/25/2008

Cranford Chronicle
Letter to the Editor

January 25, 2008

Many Reasons Why Tower is Inappropriate

To The Chronicle:

Briefly, the reasons this tower is totally inappropriate are:

1. Too many important zoning laws would be ignored and too many serious variances required to build it here.

2. The tower would be located in an all-residential area and will set a precedent for more such towers to be erected in residential zones, destroying neighborhoods.

3. Property values would be severely reduced, and nearby owners would have difficulty selling their homes.

4. It would be accompanied by a diesel generator and 225-gallon fuel tank.

5. Unknown health and safety issues.

6. The cell tower and antennas will stand approximately 60 feet above the tree tops, with four to five levels of antennas. Operation of such a tower would be 24 hours daily, seven days a week.

7. It will denigrate the atmosphere of the area and adjacent Lenape Park, which is used by residents from many nearby towns, and have an adverse effect on the Rahway River Parkway Historic District. The Union County Board of Chosen Freeholders adamantly opposes the construction of this cell phone tower at the Cranford Swimming Club site. Natural areas of placid parkland should be preserved for use now and for the future.

It is evident that other areas will be subject to cell phone towers put in residential areas, so let us stop this proposal now and let the elected officials of Cranford and Westfield know this is unacceptable. Please attend the Jan. 28 meeting of the Cranford Zoning Board. Call (908) 709-7216 for confirmation of the meeting.

JENNY SCHUVART

Rahway River Association - Letter to the Editor 1/25/2008

Cranford Chronicle
Letter to the Editor

Friday, January 25, 2008

Town Should Help Find Solution for Tower Trouble

To The Chronicle:

With a mission of preserving open space, protecting natural resources and improving water quality in the Rahway River watershed, the Rahway River Association is concerned about the proposed 130-foot cell tower being considered for the Township of Cranford.

Located in a residential area adjacent to the county-owned Lenape Park, the proposed tower raises a multitude of concerns that elevates the issue beyond the typical not-in-my-backyard attitude. For the Cranford Township Board of Adjustment, the application may turn on the positive and negative criteria that provide guidance for the individual board members to render a decision. As they consider the application, the board members have an obligation to recognize other mandates and laws that govern their decision-making process.

Of paramount importance is the implication that the New Jersey Historic Preservation Office, the state agency mandated to protect the integrity of state and federal historic sites and landscapes, has a direct regulatory role in protecting the Olmsted landscape of Lenape Park from "adverse impacts." Specifically, how will the tower mar the viewshed of Lenape Park from a variety of line of sight perspectives? Does the proposed tower pose a threat to nocturnal migratory songbirds, which are attracted to the high elevated light sources? Inevitably, these attractions result in their collision with the structure itself, which is invariably fatal. Be advised that the Federal Communications Commission conferred upon the state Historic Preservation Office the legal mandate to regulate towers if they impacted historic and cultural resources. SHIPO's declaration of "adverse impacts" cannot be ignored by the Cranford Township Board of Adjustment.

Locating a cell tower on the land of a private swim club surrounded by a residential community is not only incongruent but should have been foreseen as highly unpopular. Such insensitivity is inconsistent with the progressive values of Cranford residents that cherish the Rahway River, fill their parks and are justifiably proud of their community. Efforts to erect a cell tower amid the Cranford Swimming Club grounds suggest that either the facility is suffering some fiscal challenge or is in dire need of some capital improvement. Either way, the Township of Cranford should weigh in with a potential solution.

If money is the primary issue for the Cranford Swimming Club, then the township should negotiate with the organization to sell their development rights immediately to the municipality or Union County. Subject to appraisal, the Cranford Swimming Club could get an infusion of several hundred thousands of public dollars for their land while the township gets an easement prohibiting them from any development in the future. The funds can be used by the swim club for whatever their needs are. As a condition of the transaction, the club can open its membership to the public for a fee, while the land is protected for the benefit of all.

DENNIS O. MIRANDA
Executive Director
Rahway River Association

The Westfield Leader 1/24/2008

Letter To The Editor

Residents Need to Attend Meeting And Voice Opposition to Tower

There will be a Cranford zoning-board meeting on January 28 at 8:15 p.m. on the status of the proposed 130-foot cell tower located at the Cranford Swim Club property on the Cranford/Westfield border. Briefly, the reasons this tower is totally inappropriate here are stated here forth. 1, Too many important zoning laws ignored and too many serious variances required to build it here. 2, Tower would be located in an all-residential area and will set a precedent for more such towers to be erected in residential zones, thereby destroying neighborhoods. 3, Property values would be severely reduced and owners would have difficulty selling homes near such a site. 4, The tower would have a diesel generator and 225-gallon fuel tank. 5, Unknown health and safety issues. 6, The cell tower and antennas would stand approximately 60 feet above the three tops with four to five levels of antennas. Operation of such a tower would be 24 hours daily, seven days a week. 7, The tower will denigrate atmosphere of area and adjacent Lenape Park used by residents from District. The Union County Board of Chosen Freeholders adamantly opposes the construction of this cell phone tower at the Cranford Swim Club site. Natural areas of placid parkland should be preserved for use now and for the future. It is evident that other areas will be subject to cell towers put in residential areas so let us stop this proposal now and let the elected officials of our towns, of Cranford and Westfield, know this is unacceptable. Please attend the January 28 meeting in Cranford of the zoning board. Call (908) 709-7216 for confirmation of the meeting.

Jenny Schuvart
Westfield

Local Source: Cranford News 1/23/2008

Board Gets Some More of Cell Tower Plan

By Paul Greulich
January 23, 2008

CRANFORD, NJ - Monday’s meeting of the Zoning Board is expected to feature final testimonial and public comments on the controversial cell tower application that has livened up the board’s meetings the last few months.

The applicant, Verizon, is seeking height and setback variances needed to place the 130-foot pole on the grounds of the Cranford Swimming Club in a residential area.

The township Zoning Board could vote on the application at Monday night’s meeting.

The pole would feature four separate antennae servicing companies that include Omnipoint, Sprint and Verizon. Revenue generated for the swim club by having the tower on their property has been estimated at exceeding $20,000.

Area residents’ concern has focused on aesthetics and location in relation to property lines and the adjoining park, but there has also been mention of health hazards associated with living near cell towers, a factor that remains a topic of concern despite not yet having been scientifically substantiated.

Since the proposal appeared, opposition has arisen from other sources as well. The State Historic Preservation Office has stated that the tower must be canceled or modified to mitigate its impact upon the adjacent Lenape Park and the Rahway River Park historic district.

Freeholder Bette Jane Kowalski, who was the chairwoman last year, said the Freeholder board fully supports this opinion, and is advocating against the construction of the cell tower.

“The park is eligible for landmark status and that means the state sets certain guidelines for what can be done near a park considered a historic place or on the register to be on the list of historic places,” Kowalski explained.

Another consideration is the active bird watching community that frequents Lenape Park where some rare species have been sighted.

Previous cell tower projects in Cranford and other areas have involved towers that utilize existing tall structures, with the upper reaches of the antennae encased in false facades like cupola and chimneys, but Hellenbrecht said that such options appear less likely in this instance.

Kowalski said she feels cell towers are a necessary part of life, but finds the proposed location near the park unsuitable.

Both Cranford and Westfield residents have gotten involved in the issue because the proposed tower would be visible from across the border in the next town.

Zoning Board members Chris Drew and Richard Brightman were not available for comment by press time. Cranford Swimming Club official Jackie McDermott did not return calls for comment.

Paul Greulich can be reached at 908-686-7700 ext. 121, or at theeagle@thelocalsource.com.

Article Courtesy of LocalSource.com

Why Are We Opposing This Cell Tower?

So, the question has been asked; Why are the residents opposed to the 130' cell tower proposal at the Cranford Swim Club?

The Cranford Swim Club, is a private [members only] swim club which is located at 201 County Park Drive in Cranford, NJ.

It is directly adjacent to the very scenic and historic district [i.e. the Rahway River Parkway Historic District] of Lenape Park, across the street from Nomahegan Park and is located within a Residential Zone [R-1]. The Cranford Swim Club is also directly adjacent to several neighborhoods with many private homes. These towns include Cranford, Westfield and Kenilworth.

The proposed cell tower would extend approximately 60 feet above the tree tops showing up to 5 levels [60 feet] of antennas and other unsightly items.

It would dominate the entire landscape of our parks and all surrounding neighborhoods. In addition, it would drastically reduce the property values of homes as well as jeopardize the ability of homeowners in the area to insure and/or sell their homes.

Verizon is currently seeking EIGHT variances from the Cranford Zoning Board of Adjustment:

1. A variance to allow a cell tower to be located within a Residential [R-1] Zone. According to the Cranford Land Development Law 136-33K(6), towers ARE NOT permitted in any Residentially Zoned [R-1/R-2] area of Cranford;

2. A variance to allow a 130 foot tower where the maximum allowable height for any tower is 70 feet [Cranford Land Development Law 136-33K(10)] - This tower would extend approximately 60 feet ABOVE the existing tree tops;

3. A variance to have the tower setback only 14 feet from the nearest Property Line whereas under the Cranford Land Development Law (136-33K(10)(b), the required setback for a tower is 125% of the tower height; or in this case 162.5 feet;

4. Under the Cranford Land Development Law 136-33K(10)(c), the minimum required setback to a Residential [R-1/R-2] Zone for a tower is 300% of the height of the tower; 390 feet in this case. Verizon is trying to put the tower WITHIN a Residential Zone - not the required 390 feet AWAY from a Residential Zone;

5. A variance to allow a 345 square foot Equipment Shelter, which would exceed the maximum 200 square foot allowance under law for an Equipment Cabinet [Cranford Land Development Law 136-33K(12)(a)];

6. The required Front Yard Setback for an Equipment Compound/Shelter is 35 feet. Verizon is proposing the Equipment Compound/Shelter be only 15 feet from the nearest front Property Line [Cranford Land Development Law 136-30.6)];

7. The required Side Yard Setback for an equipment compound/shelter is 62.8 feet [10% of the lot width]. Verizon is proposing that the Equipment Compound/Shelter be setback ONLY 13 feet from the nearest side Property Line [Cranford Land Development Law 136-30.7]

8. The Cranford Swim Club is located in a single family residential zone (R-1 zone). Under Cranford Land Development Law 136-31B(6); the number of buildings are restricted in this zone. There shall not be more than one principal structure on each lot in the R-1 through R-5 districts. Because this property already has a principal use structure, Verizon is requesting a variance to allow more than one principal use on the Cranford Swim Club lot. [NOTE: Cell towers are NOT permitted as accessory uses OR principal uses in a residential zone!]

THIS TOWER WILL:
Consist of 4 to 5 Seperate Carriers and Levels of Antennas;
Require a Diesel Generator & 250 Gallon Fuel Tank;
Introduce Unknown Health & Safety Issues into the Immediate Area;
Require Immense Setback & Height Variances;
Drastically Reduce Property Values;
Impede the ability of area homeowners to insure and/or sell their homes;
Destroy the Atmosphere of the Adjacent Lenape Park & Nomahegan Park;
Destroy the Atmosphere of our Neighborhood;
Forever Alter the Character of the Township of Cranford;
Destroy the Natural Aesthetics of the Surrounding County Parks

A clear message must be sent to the Cranford Zoning Board of Adjustment, governing bodies and cell phone companies that cell towers do not belong near or around ANY residential areas.

I strongly urge everyone to sign our online petition and show your opposition to this proposed cell tower at the Cranford Swim Club.

Please also take a moment to pass along the link to this petition to anyone and everyone who would like to get involved!

We will continue to collect signatures until this application is DENIED.

Please take a moment to sign:

www.petitiononline.com/notocsc

Thank you so very much for your overwhelming support! We look forward to continuing a strong fight against placing cell towers in our residential areas!

We look forward to seeing everyone at the next Zoning Board Meeting!

PLEASE NOTE: THIS TOWER WILL BE PRECEDENT SETTING IN OUR TOWN. IF THE TOWNSHIP ALLOWS THIS TOWER AND ADJOINING EQUIPMENT COMPOUND TO BE CONSTRUCTED IN A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL ZONE [R-1], THE FUTURE PRECEDENT WILL THEN BE SET IN STONE. THIS WILL OPEN A HUGE LOOPHOLE FOR OTHER CELL CARRIERS TO COME INTO OTHER RESIDENTIALLY ZONED AREAS OF OUR TOWN AND EASILY BE APPROVED TO PLACE A TOWER WHEREVER THEY MAY PLEASE.

WE HAVE ZONING ORDINANCES AND LAWS FOR A REASON. PLEASE SPEAK UP AND DEMAND THAT OUR ZONING BOARD UPHOLD THESE LAWS. THE MEMBERS OF THE ZONING BOARD WERE PUT ON THAT BOARD FOR A REASON. THERE ARE ZONING ORDINANCES IN PLACE AND THEY CLEARLY DICTATE THAT THIS CELL TOWER IS NOT PERMITTED IN THE PROPOSED AREA OF THE CRANFORD SWIM CLUB.

STAND UP AND FIGHT CRANFORD! YOU DESERVE TO BE HEARD!

Action Alert! Zoning Board Meeting 1/28/2008

The Cranford Zoning Board of Adjustment will be holding a continuation meeting for the Cranford Swim Club cell tower proposal on Monday, January 28, 2008. This meeting will be absolutely crucial as attorneys for both the residents as well as the County of Union will be questioning the witnesses that Verizon has presented.

Meeting Information:

DATE: Monday, January 28, 2008

TIME: 8:15pm

PLACE: Cranford Municipal Building [Room 107], 8 Springfield Avenue, Cranford, New Jersey

The following will be heard:

Application #Z17-07: (Continuation)
New York SMSA Limited Partnership, Applicant
201 County Park Drive, Block 109, Lot 46, R-1 Zone

To permit construction of a telecommunications tower with the following variances/waivers:

Tower not permitted in the R-1 zone (136-33K(6);

To exceed the maximum allowable height for a tower (136-33K(10);

Less than the minimum required setback for a tower (136-33K(10)(b);

Less than the minimum required setback to a residential zone for a tower (136-33K(10)(c);

To exceed the maximum allowable square footage for an equipment cabinet (136-33K(12)(a);

Less than the minimum required front yard setback for equipment (136-30.6);

Less than the minimum required side yard setback (136-30.7)

PUBLIC PORTION - Any interested party may appear at said hearing and participate therein in accordance with the rules of the Zoning Board.

Please mark your calendars and make arrangements to attend. This meeting is absolutely crucial and we must have a strong residential turnout to show our complete opposition against this cell tower proposal!

We encourage you to bring along your friends, family members, neighbors; everyone and anyone who is willing to attend. There is absolute power in numbers and we need to clearly show our opposition before the board.

We hope to see you all there!

Update 1/01/2008

Happy New Year to All!

I hope that everyone had a happy and safe holiday season and I wish everyone all the health and happiness in the world in 2008!

I just wanted to leave a quick update as to the status of the next Zoning Board Meeting for the hearing of the application of the cell tower at the Cranford Swim Club.

The next meeting is currently scheduled for Monday, January 28, 2008. This meeting will be held at the Cranford Municipal Building at 8:00pm.

Should there be any scheduling changes, I will immediately post all relevant information.

Thank you again to all who have fought so hard to stop this tower from coming into our residential area!

Please continue to sign and pass along our online petition!

Happy New Year!

Action Alert! Write to Your Local Newspaper Today!

For those who wish to write letters to the editor of your local newspapers voicing your concerns and opposition to the cell tower application at the Cranford Swim Club, I have compiled a list of the appropriate links.

Please click the appropriate link below to the newspaper that you wish to submit a letter to:

The Suburban News

Cranford Chronicle

The Eagle

The Star Ledger

The Westfield Leader

The Scotch Plains - Fanwood Times

If there are any other newspaper links that you would like to see added to this list, please email me at residents.act@gmail.com and I will gladly add all additional links.

Thank you again to everyone for all of the support that we have received! Please continue to spread our online petition - we greatly appreciate each and every signature!

Have a wonderful evening!

The Westfield Leader 12/13/2007

CF WF Residents Hire Lawyer to Oppose Cell Tower

By CHRISTINA M. HINKE

CRANFORD — Opponents of a proposed 130-foot-high cell tower have hired an attorney to fight the proposal, which would be situated at the Cranford Swim Club. Testimony on the application, which the Union County freeholder board also opposes, continued Monday night at a special meeting of the Cranford Zoning Board of Adjustment.

New York SMSA Limited Partnership seeks height and setback variances. During the Cranford zoning board’s meeting in October, the applicant’s attorney, Gregory Meese, said the county did not voice concerns over the proposal to SMSA.

On Monday night, First Deputy County Counsel Norman Albert, also a Cranford resident, stood on the sidelines to wait to question the testimonies heard that evening. About 90 Cranford and Westfield residents opposed to the tower have hired their own attorney, John Schmidt. He said he plans to bring in his own professional planner and radiofrequency consultant to testify before the board.

Civil engineer Anthony Suppa, testifying for the applicant, said that due to an order adopted October 2, cellphone carriers must have an eighthour battery backup at the tower’s equipment shelter. Verizon has a generator; thereby, this order does not apply to them, he said. However, Mr. Suppa said, the other carriers that plan to go on the tower – Sprint, Omnipoint and Cingular – only have about a two- to three-hour backup. They are looking into the eight-hour back up to comply with regulations. Mr. Suppa said the shelter would have no increase in size for the new batteries.

Mr. Meese also introduced Glenn Pierson, a radiofrequency design and engineering consultant. He presented topography maps of each carrier’s coverage area and the increase in coverage the proposed tower would bring. Displaying cell-phone coverage maps, he testified that on average,
each carrier has a gap in coverage from Springfield Avenue to Kenilworth Boulevard, the Chippewa Road neighborhood and from Springfield Avenue to Gallows Hill Road to the south.

Mr. Pierson’s maps of one carrier showed coverage for medium-density buildings, such as brick buildings found at schools, another carrier with coverage for low-density buildings, such as non-stone houses, then another with outdoor or in-vehicle coverage.

“How do we know if there really is a gap?” Board Chairman Robert Hellenbrecht asked. “We’re mixing apples and oranges.” “What is the benefit to our community?” he questioned. Mr. Pierson said the holes in coverage in the area, especially at Cranford High School, Union County College and Nomahegan Park, are “substantial” and could cause a threat in case of an emergency.

Mr. Hellenbrecht said students at the high school are not allowed to use their cell phones. Other residents in the audience interjected that there are emergency practices in place and there are landline phones at the high school.

Later, resident Melanie Graceffo said she found it important for students to have cell-phone service at schools in case of emergencies and asked Mr. Pierson about the potential coverage for all area schools. “This application does not touch schools in the south or east by Orange Avenue,” Mr. Pierson said.

The county and opposition attorneys will have a chance to counter Mr. Pierson’s testimony at the next meeting, scheduled for Monday, January 28, board officials said. Mr. Pierson also listed the other properties the applicant approached for the tower site: Nomahegan Park, Dreyer Farms, Union County College, Fairview Cemetery, Sunrise Assisted Living, Church of Christ Echo Lake, Lenape Park and the Holy Trinity Greek Orthodox Church. “We’ve looked at every possible place since 2002,” Mr. Pierson said.

He said Union County College and Dreyer Farms declined to have the cell tower located on their properties. Mr. Albert said he would like to see proof of the sites that said “no,” saying he believed the applicant never approached Dreyer Farms. The board also asked for evidence of the reasons behind those sites that declined the applicant’s request.

Update! 12/13/2007

Good Morning Everyone!

I just wanted to leave a brief post to let everyone know that I am currently putting together a briefing of Monday night's Zoning Board meeting for those who may have been unable to attend or who were not able to stay for the entire meeting.

I hope to have this post up by this evening.

If you have any specific points from the meeting that you would like me to add to the briefing, please email me at residents.act@gmail.com so that I may add them to the post.

Thank you again to all who attended the meeting. We had a great turnout and I am happy to say that we are slowly making progress!

For those who were not able to attend the meeting or who had to leave early; the next meeting has been scheduled for Monday, January 28, 2008.

Please check back often and please continue to sign and pass along our petition! We greatly appreciate all of the support!

Have a wonderful day!

Action Alert! Zoning Board Meeting 12/10/2007

The Cranford Zoning Board of Adjustment will hold a continuation meeting for the Cranford Swim Club cell tower proposal on Monday, December 10, 2007 at the Cranford Municipal Building, 8 Springfield Avenue, Cranford, New Jersey to consider the following.

Formal action may be taken.

PUBLIC MEETING – 8:15 P.M.

Application #Z17-07: (Continuation)
New York SMSA Limited Partnership, Applicant
201 County Park Drive, Block 109, Lot 46, R-1 Zone

To permit construction of a telecommunications tower with the following variances/waivers:

Tower not permitted in the R-1 zone (136-33K(6);

To exceed the maximum allowable height for a tower (136-33K(10);

Less than the minimum required setback for a tower (136-33K(10)(b);

Less than the minimum required setback to a residential zone for a tower (136-33K(10)(c);

To exceed the maximum allowable square footage for an equipment cabinet (136-33K(12)(a);

Less than the minimum required front yard setback for equipment (136-30.6);

Less than the minimum required side yard setback (136-30.7)

PUBLIC PORTION - Any interested party may appear at said hearing and participate therein in accordance with the rules of the Zoning Board.

Please mark your calendars and make arrangements to attend. This meeting is absolutely crucial and we must have a strong residential turnout to show our complete opposition against this cell tower proposal!

We encourage you to bring along your friends, family members, neighbors; everyone and anyone who is willing to attend. There is absolute power in numbers and we need to clearly show our opposition before the board.

We hope to see you all there!

The Westfield Leader 12/06/2007

The following is a brief article excerpt from The Westfield Leader, "County Closes on Purchases of Church Property, Farm", 12/06/2007.

Referencing the Union County Board of Chosen Freeholders:

"The board also approved a resolution opposing a cell tower New York SMSA Limited Partnership has proposed for the Cranford Swim Club. The case will resume this Monday at 8:15 p.m. before the Cranford board of adjustment."

Read the entire article here.

Local Source: Cranford News 12/05/2007

Resistance Gains on Cell Tower Plan

By Paul Greulich, Staff Writer
Wednesday, December 5, 2007

CRANFORD, NJ - Opposition has increased over a proposal to erect a cell tower on the site of the Cranford Swimming Club as the application will be heard again on Monday before the Township Zoning Board.

The December 10th Zoning Board meeting will see the issue revisited as the applicant, Verizon, pursues the height and setback variances needed to place the 130-foot pole in a residential area. The pole would feature four separate antennae servicing companies that include Omnipoint, Sprint and Verizon. Revenue generated for the swim club by having the tower on their property has been estimated at exceeding $20,000.

Citizens’ concern has focused on aesthetics and location in relation to property lines and the adjoining park, but there has also been mention of health hazards associated with living near cell towers, a factor that remains a topic of concern despite not yet having been scientifically substantiated.

Citizens voiced these feelings at the Oct. 15 Zoning Board meeting as well as the Nov. 27 Township Committee meeting.

“If this can happen in our neighborhood, I want everyone to know it can happen in their neighborhood,” one resident said. Township officials encouraged the residents who spoke to make their voices heard before the Zoning Board.

Public Safety Commissioner George McDonough was vocal on his opposition to the tower.

“In four weeks or so I’ll be a citizen and I look forward to joining forces with you,” said McDonough.

The subject of Mayor Michael Plick and Finance Commissioner David Robinson’s status as members of the Cranford Swimming Club was also brought up as a potential conflict of interests. Plick pointed out that the issue is currently before the Zoning Board, of which neither he, Robinson or any other commissioners are members.
“If at any pont in time a conflict should arise, I would recuse myself,” Plick said.

Residents also complained about the amount of time, money and effort it was costing them to oppose the potential project.

“We’re going to have to spend tens of thousands of dollars for an attorney to represent us in this case,” said Westfield resident Jack Shuvart whose home borders the Township of Cranford and in turn the swim club. “It should be thrown out quick. This takes a lot out of our lives.”

Since the proposal appeared, opposition has arisen from other sources as well. The State Historic Preservation Office has stated that the tower must be canceled or modified to mitigate its impact upon the adjacent Lenape Park and the Rahway River Park historic district.

Freeholder Chair Bette Jane Kowalski said the Freeholder Board fully supports this opinion, and is advocating against the construction of the cell tower.

“The park is eligible for landmark status and that means the state sets certain guidelines for what can be done near a park considered a historic place or on the register to be on the list of historic places,” Kowalski explained.

No one on the Swimming Club Board could be reached for comment.

Public Affairs Commissioner George Jorn said it might only be a small contingent in the club’s leadership that is pushing for the project. He pointed out that the club has remained silent despite the concern surrounding the issue.

“They probably know they’re doing something wrong,” Jorn said.

Article Courtesy of LocalSource.com

Record-Press 11/30/2007

Swim Club Neighbors Angry Over Cell Tower

Friday, November 30, 2007

By LESLIE MURRAY

Cranford - In the quiet stretch of forest that borders Lenape Park, a battle is underway. The fight has been joined between wireless phone companies who say they are trying to meet the growing demand for service, and local residents who say they want to preserve their way of life. Nearly 50 residents from both Westfield and Cranford attended a Cranford Township Committee meeting Tuesday night, asking elected officials there to support strict enforcement of zoning laws.

The application, which will be continued before the Cranford Zoning Board of Adjustment on Dec. 10, is an effort by a cooperative of four phone companies to build a 130-foot monopole tower and a 2,760-square foot equipment compound at the Cranford Swimming Club (CSC) on County Park Drive, on the border with Westfield.

Verizon Wireless, Sprint Mobile, AT& T and Omnipoint, a branch of T-Mobile, say they need the tower to fill a gap in coverage, but residents in the two towns have expressed concern about the impact the pole would have on their health, aesthetics and property values. While the proposal is for a site owned by the CSC, the application is being presented by the phone companies, which would pay a rental fee to the club for the land if the plan is approved.

Kim Ancin, a spokesperson for Verizon Wireless, the lead company in the application, said the location of the proposed tower is about providing the best service as demand for wireless communications increases. The tower location is not selected randomly, Ancin said. "There's a lot of testing that goes on before a site is ever determined," she said.

But that does little to quell the concern of residents, who say the proposed tower would dwarf everything in the area, transforming the feel of their residential neighborhood. Residents said they have hired an attorney to represent their interests as the application proceeds.

On Tuesday night, Joe Muratore of Cranford told the Township Committee he and his wife bought their home on Kenilworth Boulevard because it was nestled between Lenape and Nomahegan parks. The proposed cell tower "doesn't belong in a residential neighborhood," Muratore said.

His wife, Audrey Muratore, made similar statements on a recent day as she and Westfield resident Myron Kesselhaut toured the area behind Kesselhaut's home.
From his back yard, Kesselhaut can clearly see through a chain link fence into the swim club's property. Kesselhaut said when he bought his home 38 years ago he knew he shared a property line with the club, but he fell in love with an expansive backyard and the natural setting that expands to the wooded area behind his home.

Kesselhaut said the original letter notifying residents of the plan left him confused about the tower's proposed location. After obtaining a copy of the project plans, he and a neighbor were able to pinpoint the location, which he says is just 14 feet from his shared property line with the swim club.

During testimony at the first hearing on the proposal in October, witnesses for the phone company said the tower would be nearly 250 feet from Kesselhaut's back door, but he said that does not take into account the 20-foot deck behind his home.
"I feel they're misleading people as to where (the cell tower) is," added Audrey Muratore.

The neighbors say they are also worried that the height of the tower and a planned diesel generator will create safety concerns that could affect their homeowners' insurance policies. What makes them most angry, perhaps, is their belief that the swim club is not being a good neighbor.

"This shows a total disregard for the surrounding neighborhood," Audrey Muratore said. "The only people who are going to do well by this are the people swimming in that pool."

Kesselhaut said he has been willing to accommodate inconveniences, but the proposal for a cell tower crosses the line. "I hear the noise when they play tennis, but I let it go. They often leave the lights on, which doesn't bother me. But when these leaves are down and those lights are on, I don't have to put the lights on in my house," Kesselhaut said. "I don't think this is fair."

Requests for comment from the president of the swim club, Trudy Allen, were not returned this week, and the attorney for the club, Nicholas Giuditta, referred questions to the phone companies' attorney.

Kesselhaut's complaints were echoed Tuesday night, when Westfield residents John and Jenny Schuvart spoke before the Township Committee. Jenny Schuvart suggested that Cranford form a committee to identify desirable locations for cell towers that are outside of residential areas. "There's something lacking when big corporations can come in and dictate what they want and we have to go out and defend our way of life," she said.

Carl Woodward, Cranford's municipal attorney, explained to the crowd that the Board of Adjustment is an autonomous body that operates without direction from the Township Committee. However, he lauded the group's decision to hire an attorney and said a large turn-out could affect the board's deliberations.

Township commissioners are generally discouraged from commenting on pending land-use applications. Of the three commissioners present Tuesday, only George McDonough spoke about his opinion of the application, saying his personal legal counsel had advised him he could address the issue.

McDonough, who recently lost his re-election bid, said he felt compelled to side with residents. "I agree with you, this is not the kind of thing we want to have in a residential neighborhood," he said. "In about four weeks I will be a (private) citizen, and I look forward to joining forces with you," McDonough said to a round of applause.

The residents in the area are not the only ones objecting to the plan. The State Historic Preservation Office has objected to the location because Lenape Park is part of the Rahway River Parkway Historic District. "The project will have an adverse effect on the Historic District," Preservation Officer Dorothy P. Guzzo wrote. "Please note that this is not a close call. Setting is an integral part of the park experience."

A similar objection came from Union County Freeholder Chairwoman Bette Jane Kowalski, who said she is "not in favor of permitting anything that obstructs the view from a Union County park."

When the application is continued on Dec. 10, a professional planner and radio frequency expert are expected to testify before the Board of Adjustment.

Leslie Murray is staff writer for NJN Publishing. She can be reached at (732) 396-4205 or lmurray@njnpublishing.com.

Cranford Chronicle 11/30/2007

Swim Club Neighbors Voice Anger Over Cell Tower

Friday, November 30, 2007
By LESLIE MURRAY

CRANFORD - In the quiet stretch of forest that borders Lenape Park, a battle is underway.

The fight has been joined between wireless phone companies who say they are trying to meet the growing demand for service, and local residents who say they want to preserve their way of life. Nearly 50 residents attended a Township Committee meeting Tuesday night asking elected officials to support strict enforcement of zoning laws.

The application, which will be continued before the Zoning Board of Adjustment on Dec. 10, is an effort by a cooperative of four phone companies to build a 130-foot monopole tower and a 2,760-square foot equipment compound at the Cranford Swimming Club (CSC) on County Park Drive.

Verizon Wireless, Sprint Mobile, AT& T and Omnipoint, a branch of T-Mobile, say they need the tower to fill a gap in coverage, but residents in Cranford and Westfield have expressed concern about the impact the pole would have on their health, aesthetics and property values. While the proposal is for a site owned by the CSC, the application is being presented by the phone companies, which would pay a rental fee to the club for the land if the plan is approved.

Kim Ancin, a spokesperson for Verizon Wireless, the lead company in the application, said the location of the proposed tower is about providing the best service as demand for wireless communications increases. The tower location is not selected randomly, Ancin said. "There's a lot of testing that goes on before a site is ever determined," she said.

But that does little to quell the concern of residents from Cranford and Westfield, who say the proposed tower would dwarf everything in the area, transforming the feel of their residential neighborhood. Residents said they have hired an attorney to represent their interests as the application proceeds.

On Tuesday night, Joe Muratore told the Township Committee he and his wife bought their home on Kenilworth Boulevard because it was nestled between Lenape and Nomahegan parks. The proposed cell tower "doesn't belong in a residential neighborhood," Muratore said.

His wife, Audrey Muratore, made similar statements on a recent day as she and Westfield resident Myron Kesselhaut toured the area behind Kesselhaut's home.

From his back yard, Kesselhaut can clearly see through a chain link fence into the swim club's property. Kesselhaut said when he bought his home 38 years ago he knew he shared a property line with the club, but he fell in love with an expansive backyard and the natural setting that expands to the wooded area behind his home.

Kesselhaut said the original letter notifying residents of the plan left him confused about the tower's proposed location. After obtaining a copy of the project plans, he and a neighbor were able to pinpoint the location, which he says is just 14 feet from his shared property line with the swim club.

During testimony at the first hearing on the proposal in October, witnesses for the phone company said the tower would be nearly 250 feet from Kesselhaut's back door, but he said that does not take into account the 20-foot deck behind his home.

"I feel they're misleading people as to where (the cell tower) is," added Audrey Muratore.

The neighbors say they are also worried that the height of the tower and a planned diesel generator will create safety concerns that could affect their homeowners' insurance policies. What makes them most angry, perhaps, is their belief that the swim club is not being a good neighbor.

"This shows a total disregard for the surrounding neighborhood," Audrey Muratore said. "The only people who are going to do well by this are the people swimming in that pool."

Kesselhaut said he has been willing to accommodate inconveniences, but the proposal for a cell tower crosses the line.

"I hear the noise when they play tennis, but I let it go. They often leave the lights on, which doesn't bother me. But when these leaves are down and those lights are on, I don't have to put the lights on in my house," Kesselhaut said. "I don't think this is fair."

Requests for comment from the president of the swim club, Trudy Allen, were not returned this week, and the attorney for the club, Nicholas Giuditta, referred questions to the phone companies' attorney.

Kesselhaut's complaints were echoed Tuesday night, when Westfield residents John and Jenny Schuvart spoke before the Township Committee.

Jenny Schuvart suggested that Cranford form a committee to identify desirable locations for cell towers that are outside of residential areas. "There's something lacking when big corporations can come in and dictate what they want and we have to go out and defend our way of life," she said.

Township Attorney Carl Woodward explained to the crowd that the Board of Adjustment is an autonomous body that operates without direction from the Township Committee. However, he lauded the group's decision to hire an attorney and said a large turn-out could affect the board's deliberations.

Township commissioners are generally discouraged from commenting on pending land-use applications. Of the three commissioners present Tuesday, only George McDonough spoke about his opinion of the application, saying his personal legal counsel had advised him he could address the issue.

McDonough, who recently lost his re-election bid, said he felt compelled to side with residents. "I agree with you, this is not the kind of thing we want to have in a residential neighborhood," he said. "In about four weeks I will be a (private) citizen, and I look forward to joining forces with you," McDonough said to a round of applause.

The residents in the area are not the only ones objecting to the plan. The State Historic Preservation Office has objected to the location because Lenape Park is part of the Rahway River Parkway Historic District.

"The project will have an adverse effect on the Historic District," Preservation Officer Dorothy P. Guzzo wrote. "Please note that this is not a close call. Setting is an integral part of the park experience."

A similar objection came from Freeholder Chairwoman Bette Jane Kowalski, who said she is "not in favor of permitting anything that obstructs the view from a Union County park."

When the application is continued on Dec. 10, a professional planner and radio frequency expert are expected to testify before the Board of Adjustment.

Leslie Murray is staff writer for the Chronicle. She can be reached at (732) 396-4205 or lmurray@njnpublishing.com.

Cranford Chronicle 11/30/2007

Letter to the Editor

Friday, November 30, 2007

Swim Club Cell Tower Just Doesn't Belong

To The Chronicle:

I wished to read the following statement at the Oct. 15 Zoning Board of Adjustment meeting held at the Cranford municipal building, but was unable to do so due to time constraints:

My husband and I have lived in Westfield since 1965 and have raised our five children here in the same home. They are good citizens and caring adults. We chose this area because we are nature lovers and wanted our family to enjoy the peace and beauty of the woods and watch the animals and birds who live here. We belonged to the Cranford Swimming Club for many years -- at least 25 -- and our children worked at the club during their summer vacations. They still have many friends in Westfield and Cranford. As our children left to pursue their lives, we resigned our membership.

We have been good citizens, paid our taxes, helped in our community and counted on being treated fairly and protected by our government and its laws. We are in our 70s and hoped to live here until illness or death. We recently began upgrading the landscaping in our front yard and plan to put in new shrubs and lawn.

On Oct. 6, our peace was shattered when we received a certified letter informing us that Cranford Swimming Club, whose property abuts our back yard, was allowing a 130-foot (13-story) cell phone tower and big storage buildings containing electrical equipment to be erected on its property, or as close to Westfield as possible, and practically in our and our neighbors' back yards. The letter stated that at least four cell phone companies were seeking to obtain variances to accomplish this at a meeting to be held at the Cranford Zoning Board on Oct. 15 -- only a few days away!

When we saw their plans, we couldn't believe that this ugly project would be so close to our homes. The massive tower would loom over our residential areas in Westfield and Cranford.

We feel it does not belong here due to its immense size and ugly industrial appearance. It would be plainly visible to people who run, walk, take photos or wish to spend time with nature in adjoining Lenape Park. These people are trying to get away from this type of atmosphere and it would be right in their faces if this were approved. This monster should be -- if anywhere -- in an industrial area, a busy highway, or isolated area with no homes nearby, but not here! It should not be located next to homes in a residential area or destroy the beauty of a park area, of which we have too little of in Union County. Anyone can see it doesn't belong here except if you are blinded by greed!

Cranford Swimming Club and the cell phone companies, Verizon Wireless, Omnipoint, Cingular and Sprint, would be reaping huge financial rewards while the people who live here in Westfield and Cranford will incur loss of property values (some very severe) and have to live with this ugly "Goliath" 24 hours a day. It would destroy our area!

Westfield recently shot down a proposal for a smaller cell phone tower in this area and, at that time, it was determined that adequate cell phone communications existed here.

If this project is approved it would be difficult to stay here because our quality of life would be so diminished. The tower is so high it would loom over our homes and be plainly visible from inside and outside. It would be located 14 feet off our next door neighbor's property. It would have to have some illumination because of its height and noise and pollution possibilities due to 24-hour operation.

We moved here because we wanted to be with trees and nature, not to have an industrial-looking monster imposed upon us. Also, it would be almost impossible to get a fair price for our home because who would want to purchase a house with a cell phone tower looming 13 stories above the property? The financial equity we have built up over the years in our home would be destroyed and the quality of our lives and our neighbors' lives would be severely impacted, both financially and emotionally.

What good are laws if powerful interests can seek variances to go around them or subvert them completely to their own ends? The residents of Westfield and Cranford have to be protected by their zoning boards, or what good are they?

There will be a very important meeting on Dec. 10 at the Cranford municipal building concerning the future of this proposal. Call the Zoning Board at (908) 709-7216 for confirmation and time of meeting.

JENNY SCHUVART
Westfield

Residents Speak Out! 11/27/2007

Several residents of both Cranford and Westfield were present at the Cranford Township Committee meeting this evening which was televised live on Cranford's local television station, TV35.

Among comments made to the Cranford Township Committee:

Joseph Muratore, 106 Kenilworth Boulevard, spoke in opposition to the cell antenna tower that is being proposed at the Cranford Swim Club. Discussed a law that prohibits the placement of such towers within 390 feet of the nearest residential property. Expressed concern regarding the potential impact this could have on property values. Explained that residents have hired an attorney to assist them with this issue. Feels the Township Committee should designate specific areas within the Township, such as industrial areas, for these types of towers. Also urged members of the Swim Club to voice opposition to proposal.

Deputy Mayor Puhak reminded residents that the Township Committee is prohibited from commenting on issues that are currently before the Board of Adjustment.

Township Attorney Woodward discussed the need for residents to speak before the Zoning Board of Adjustment, explaining that that is where their voices would be most effective. Discussed Federal Communications Commission (FCC) regulations and the local land use law in connection with the construction of cell phone antennas. Explained that any owner of private property can request a variance from the Board of Adjustments at any time. Discussed the quasi-judicial made up of the Zoning Board of Adjustment and the application process that must be followed.

Commissioner McDonough stated that he has consulted legal counsel on this matter who advised him that he could provide comment on the issue. Stated that he agrees with the residents and is looking forward to joining forces with them next year.

Jack Schuvart, 40 Manitou Circle, Westfield, questioned why it is the responsibility of residents to hire an attorney to protect them from existing laws. Feels that the applicant is requesting that three (3) to four (4) existing laws be changed or altered to support its application.

Commissioner McDonough explained that the applicant is not requesting that laws be changed, but is seeking variances from the existing land development ordinance. Discussed the variance process. Reminded residents that the Township Committee appoints the members of the Board of Adjustment.

Mr. Schuvart discussed financial and emotional stress residents are facing because of this application.

Donald Graham, 30 Nomahegan Court, feels it is unfair that the proceeds from the cell antenna would be paid to a private club. Feels the proceeds should benefit the Township.

Commissioner McDonough discussed a previous proposal to place a cell tower on the property located behind the municipal building. Stated that residents living on Forest Avenue were opposed to this proposal and voiced their opinions, which resulted in the Township Committee’s decision to reject the proposal.

Genny Schuvart, 40 Manitou Circle, Westfield, stated that other municipalities have formed committees to investigate which locations within a municipality would be appropriate for these types of structures. Feels Cranford should form such a committee. Questioned the validity of zoning ordinances if they are not enforced to protect residents.

Myron Borden, 3 Nomahegan Court, feels the matter should be investigated by the Township Committee to prevent this from happening in other neighborhoods. Discussed the process involved with obtaining a variance. Feels the ten (10) day time frame in which applicants have to notify residents is insufficient. Feels thirty (30) days notice should be required. Suggested the Township Committee adopt an ordinance to change the noticing requirements.

Township Attorney Woodward agrees that ten (10) days notice is insufficient when receiving notice of an application for a variance. Explained that under the State Municipal Land Use Law, ten (10) days is considered adequate notice and Cranford cannot override a State law. Encouraged residents to contact legislatures and request a change to the noticing requirements.

Alvin Rotker, 64 Manitou Circle, Westfield, explained that the applicant is proposing the installation of a 130-foot cell tower fourteen (14) feet from a residential neighborhood. Feels the Township should be aware of the adverse reaction of residents to this application.

Audrey Muratore, 106 Kenilworth Boulevard, discussed the first submission of the cell antenna tower application in 2005 by the Cranford Swim Club. Feels it is unfair that the residents were given ten (10) days notice when this has been occurring for two (2) years. Stated that there are ninety-two (92) cell tower structures located within six (6) miles of the Cranford Swim Club. Expressed concern regarding the affects the structure will have on property values. Feels this issue is a conflict of interest for Mayor Plick and Commissioner Robinson, as they both members of the Cranford Swim Club. Provided a website address for residents to sign a petition in opposition to this matter.

Commissioner Robinson agrees that there is a conflict. Stated that he was unaware of the application until it was presented to the Zoning Board of Adjustment.

Rita LaBrutto, 104 Arlington Road, discussed the County report in connection with the cell antenna application. Stated that the Zoning Office does not have a copy of the report and she had filed an Open Public Records Act (OPRA) request with Union County for a copy. Feels the County should provide the Zoning Board of Adjustment with a copy of the report.

Commissioner McDonough believes that the County report that Ms. LaBrutto is referring to could be obtained from either the County Engineering Department or the County Planning Department. Stated that Freeholder B.J. Kowalski has expressed opposition to the application and mentioned the reasons why.

Carlos Collazo, 68 Manitou Circle, Westfield, discussed the permitted use of the Swim Club’s property. Feels the installation of a cell tower would not be beneficial to the public or in the best interest of the publics’ welfare. Questioned why the property owner of the Swim Club has not sought other uses for the property.

Michael Shuvart, 40 Manitou Circle, Westfield, discussed the Cranford Environmental Commission’s report in connection with the proposed cell tower. Stated that the Environmental Commission’s report indicated opposition to the proposal.

Thank you to all who were present and made their voices heard!

Continue the fight Cranford!

Update 11/27/2007

A huge thank you goes out to all of the many residents who were present and spoke at the Cranford Township Committee meeting this evening.

I want to personally thank everyone for taking the time out of their busy schedules to come forward and speak publicly about the current fight that we as residents are facing against the Cranford Swim Club.

This meeting was a great opportunity for the residents to share their insight and information with all neighboring townships and communities who may not yet be aware of the cell tower application that is currently pending in Cranford.

For those who may have missed the televised meeting, the Cranford Township Committee meeting will air again on TV35:

Wednesday/Thursday/Friday: 11:00am & 8:00pm

Saturday: 11:00am

Thanks again for all of the great work everyone!

Continue the fight Cranford!

Action Alert! Township Committee Meeting 11/27/2007

The Cranford Township Committee will hold it's next meeting on Tuesday, November 27, 2007 at 8:00pm at the Cranford Municipal Building, 8 Springfield Avenue, Cranford, New Jersey.

This meeting will be televised on TV35.

During the Public Comment portion, any interested party may speak and participate therein in accordance with the rules of the Township Committee. Five minutes will be allotted to each resident who wishes to speak and make a public comment or statement on the record.

This will be an excellent opportunity to come together as a community and let our governing parties know that cell towers do not belong in our residential areas. It will also be an opportunity to share our story publicly; as many residents are still unaware of the enormity of the cell tower proposal at the Cranford Swim Club.

Please mark your calendars and make arrangements to attend.

We also encourage you to bring along your friends, family members, neighbors; everyone and anyone who is willing to attend. There is absolute power in numbers and we need to clearly show our opposition before this committee.

We hope to see you all there!

Cranford Chronicle 11/16/2007

Letter to the Editor:

Parties Should Unite to Fight Cell Tower

To The Chronicle:

As a homeowner living on the street where a 13-story cell tower may some day be looming over me, I was happy to read in the newspaper that newly elected Township Commissioner Martha Garcia stated that she will be joining our resistance against it.

I hope that the four other Republican Township Committee members will agree to do the same. That will mean that this is an issue on which Republicans and Democrats will be working together to do the right thing for Cranford residents.

MYRON BORDEN
Cranford